integrating findings of studies of successful adults with ... - frostig… · winter...

Winter 2015-2016..............................Career Planning and Adult Development JOURNAL..............................99

Chapter 10

INTEGRATING FINDINGS of STUDIES of SUCCESSFUL ADULTS with LEARNING DISABILITIES: A New Comprehensive Model for Researchers and Practitionersby Christine A. Schnieders, Paul J. Gerber, and Roberta J. Goldberg

AbstractA new conceptual model of success integrates two empirical studies that were conducted exclu-sive of each other. Both examined the lives of two separate groups of adults with learning dis-abilities (LD) and found internal, linking, and external factors that impacted the success of the participants. Career development professionals will find the model important as a new perspec-tive for individual client planning as well as program development. Directions for future re-search and practice are discussed.

As the field of learning disabilities was growing in the 1970’s and 80’s a few groups of research-ers focused their inquiry away from examining the struggles of school-age populations to explor-ing the complexities of adulthood for individuals with learning disabilities (LD). The result was a small body of research that indicated that some individuals who survived school and independent skills development found eventual success. The elements that comprised their success have been the foundation of some of the research on the challenges facing adults with LD. Two of the stud-ies that identified elements of success are the centerpiece of this article that is an introduction to a new conceptual model. The purpose of this article is to present a conceptual model that links factors that were found to influence the success of adults with LD in two seminal research endeavors conducted separately at the same time. Both analyze the lifespan of individuals growing up with LD and broaden the scope of domains covered while focusing on a context of adult outcomes. The new model is superior to the previous ones and can better assist practitioners and researchers when considering the multitude of tools that an individual with LD needs to succeed into adulthood. The first part of the article will present previous studies of outcomes of students and adults with LD offering a scope of the issues involved. Second, other conceptual models will be reviewed that give a sense of the range of possibilities for framing the current discussion. Third, the new conceptual model will be explained in detail. Finally, implications will be discussed for practitioners and research-ers to give directions for future consideration in application and study.

100................................Career Planning and Adult Development JOURNAL.......................Winter 2015-2016

Studies of OutcomesThe majority of the studies used to create the current conceptual model were disseminated in the early 2000’s. The initial work at the Frostig Center in Pasadena, CA explored life success for a group of former students who had enrolled in Frostig from 1968 to 1975 (Spekman, Goldberg, & Herman, 1992; Spekman, Goldberg, & Herman, 1993). The researchers examined “internal factors and external events” (Goldberg, Higgins, Raskind, Herman, 2003, p. 223) that impacted the success of the group of now young adults ages 18 to 22. Ten years after the first study was completed, the same group of former students participated in a similar, follow-up study. The purpose of the second study was to address additional questions related to their disabilities and re-examine their life outcomes as adults (ages 28 to 35). The results of that study are detailed in several publications reporting both qualitative (Goldberg et al., 2003) and quantitative findings (Raskind, Goldberg, Higgins, & Herman, 1999), as well as, examining a singular attribute (Hig-gins, Raskind, Goldberg, & Herman, 2002) and suggesting possible activities to foster the de-velopment of what are known as the success attributes (Raskind, Goldberg, Higgins, & Herman, 2002). The success attributes are self-awareness, goal setting, proactivity, perseverance, use of support systems and emotional coping strategies.

Gerber’s work with other collaborators resulted in a model of alterable patterns in employment success for adults with LD. The publications about the research involved an in-depth analy-sis of the model from the qualitative study (Gerber, Ginsberg, & Reiff, 1992; Reiff, Gerber, & Ginsberg, 1997) analysis of the quantifiable data (Gerber, Schnieders, Paradise, Reiff, Ginsberg, Popp, 1990), and several other articles exploring reports from individuals with LD (Gerber & Reiff, 1991). With control as the overarching bridge, the alterable patterns were categorized as internal decisions (desire, goal orientation, reframing) and external manifestations (persistence, goodness of fit, learned creativity, social ecologies).

Since the publication of both the Frostig and Gerber studies, few studies published related to the successful outcomes of adults with LD although success continues to be of interest to the field of LD. Some emphasis has focused on increasing the likelihood of success for college age stu-dents through specific interventions addressing one or two of the factors of success. Others have explored specific components related to successful young adults (i.e., self-determination, self-efficacy, etc.).

Other studies have focused on outcomes of adults with LD. Greenbaum, Graham, and Scales (1996) studied a group of college graduates to determine the impact of their LD on their lives. In part, this study supported the findings of the Gerber and Frostig studies in that the sample was self-aware and used support systems to accomplish goals. Current studies tend to examine specific variables related to success. Madaus, Zhao, and Ruban’s (2008) study examined em-ployment satisfaction of graduates with LD. Their survey indicated that self-efficacy and self-regulation, related to some factors of success from the Gerber and Frostig studies, were better predictors of job satisfaction than salary and length of employment. Recommendations include further research on the impact of self-efficacy and self-regulation strategies (i.e., goal-setting and reframing) for school-age populations. Others found that individuals with LD had positive edu-cational and vocational outcomes by finding their niche (Horn, O’Donnell, and Vitulano, 2001; McNulty, 2003).


A cluster of studies supports using interventions to teach strategies related to success. Klassen, Tze, and Hannok (2011) conducted a meta-analysis to examine internalizing problems of adults with LD. Their findings point to the need for continued support and instruction in coping strate-gies for emotional struggles across the life span. Teglasi, Cohn, and Meshbesher (2004) studied temperament and, in part, concluded that goodness of fit and adaptability in children with LD can positively impact others response to children. Others suggest a variety of instructional activities to teach self-determination and goal-setting (Konrad, Fowler, Walker, Test, & Wood, 2007), self-advocacy (Prater, Redman, Anderson, & Gibb, 2014), and networking to facilitate communica-tion and support among peers on a campus (Agarwal, Calvo, & Kumar, 2014). Studies of coping strategies indicated that adults with LD in and out of school continue to use those strategies as a means to deal with academic and other skills deficits (Cowen, 1988; Young, 2005; Vogel & Adel-man, 1992).

Since the initial publication of both studies, no other researchers have conducted comprehensive follow-up or longitudinal examination of successful adults with LD. Although the results of the research from Gerber and Frostig is decades old, both continue to be important in the perception and understanding of LD across the life span. In the past several years, extraordinarily suc-cessful people (Gerber & Raskind, 2014), entrepreneurs (Coppola, 2007; Love, 2011) and other celebrities have disclosed their learning struggles which seems to indicate that the search for suc-cessful role models is imperative to the field.

In 2012, Gerber published a review of the research involving adults with LD to discover infor-mation to assist professionals who serve adults with LD. Gerber (2012) observes, “studies of adults with LD seem to lack a conceptual model regarding how to investigate the adult years. Studies rarely address variables of adulthood (i.e., contexts and developmental phases) and tend to explain findings from a narrow perspective, losing out on the ‘big picture’ as well as the com-plexities of adult life” (p. 33).

Other Conceptual ModelsA review of conceptual models in the literature related to LD is limited. Two models compare and contrast LD with other exceptionalities. Rock, Fessler, and Church (1997) examined over-lapping characteristics of LD and emotional/behavioral disorders and formulated a model for serving children with complicated issues. Polloway, Patton, Smith, and Buck (1997) considered the relationship of mental retardation (now termed intellectual disabilities) and LD. Although not specific to adults, both models reveal the complexities of factors related to disabilities. The Pathways Model (Kiernan & Stark, 1986) focuses on developmental disabilities, but it is intend-ed to be used by all individuals. The model considers levels of support and training specific to moving individuals to full employment solely. Murray (2003) presents a framework for transi-tioning youth with disabilities to adulthood. This model considers risk and protective factors and healthy and poor outcomes of vulnerable students as a guide. While the model takes a holistic view of transitioning to adulthood, many of the factors reflect needs related to school and com-munity rather than focusing on the individual. These models address many of the concerns for improving services for young people with LD; however, the current models lack a focus on how adults with LD can become successful. A model is required that focuses on the thoughts and ac-tions an individual with LD needs to be a success.


New Conceptual ModelThe new conceptual model offers a perspective that looks at the lifespan from a global lens and reveals those factors that professionals, families, and individuals with LD must integrate into their thinking and actions in order to reach success. The Gerber study identified the themes of success. Control was the overarching theme of an individual’s success. It was defined as “mak-ing conscious decisions to take charges in one’s life (internal decisions), and adapting and shap-ing oneself in order to move ahead (external manifestations)” (Gerber et al 1992, p. 479). From this key theme, the patterns were broken into internal decisions and external manifestations. Internal decisions were desire, goal orientation, and reframing. External manifestations or adapt-ability included persistence, goodness of fit, learned creativity and social ecologies.

The Frostig results identified self-awareness, proactivity, perseverance, goal setting, use of support systems, and emotional coping strategies. The attributes differentiate successful from unsuccessful adults with LD. Although “internal factors and external events” (Goldberg et al., 2003, p.223) were considered in the initial study, those internal and external categories were not part of the interpretation of the findings. Additional themes unrelated to the success attributes in-cluded LD across the life span, family differences, and social relationships. For both studies, the themes were part of both successful and less successful groups; however, clear differences were delineated between the groups for both studies.

Table 1 [see Appendix] provides definitions of the factors of both studies. The arrangement of the definitions is in the order found in the model. The terms associated with the Frostig study are in italics. Several of the factors have similar terms from both studies. For instance, perseverance in the Frostig study seems to be similar to Gerber’s persistence. In those and other similar cases, definitions are listed below one another in the same column.

The visual representation of the combined factors from the Gerber and Frostig studies is in Figure 1 [see Appendix]. The authors conceptualized the factors as being in one of three areas within the model indicating where each might arise as the individual practices the factors on the way to success. Factors are not mutually exclusive and are dependent upon one another for overall functioning. The importance of each factor changes as the individual matures and experi-ences challenges and rewards. Some factors are readily implemented by some individuals while others take time to develop fully. Successful individuals with LD utilize the factors throughout their lifespan to first achieve and then maintain their success. Common factors are noted with a slant line as follows: perseverance/persistence, support systems/social ecologies, and goal set-ting/orientation.

The internal factors are those decisions that an individual realizes, does, and masters consciously, but within their thoughts and processes. They are listed in order of movement toward success. These include two related, but not identical factors, desire and perseverance/persistence, as well as, goal setting/orientation, and self-awareness. Of this group, desire and then perseverance are the starting points. Successful individuals have a “burning feeling” (Gerber, Ginsberg, Reiff, 1992, p. 480) with a determination to move ahead despite adversity. With that desire to keep go-ing, the individual also understands that planning toward an aim is done through careful, incre-mental steps or goals that change as needed when other factors are addressed. The last element


within the internal factors is self-awareness. This factor requires that the individual understands his or her strengths, weaknesses, and talents. Additionally, as a part of self-awareness, the suc-cessful individual will compartmentalize their learning disability to a less overwhelming place and locate a niche that will capitalize on their strengths.

For the internal factors to have usefulness for the individual, linking factors mediate across internal and external factors. The linking factors allow internal factors to engage the external factors. Four factors progress through the linking section. Emotional coping is the first linking factor. It serves as a starting point to all others. These affective strategies, tool, mechanisms must be working to allow individuals to navigate the other factors. The second is reframing that reinterprets the learning disability in positive and productive terms. The next factor is proactivity that represents the control over the environment, the decision making, and the engagement in the world/community. The final linking factor is goodness of fit. The adult is successful because he has tools to regulate stress, can adjust and redefine his learning disability, has a sense of control over the environment. Once those pieces are in place, the individual understands what to do to capitalize on his strengths.

Once the internal and linking factors are in order, two external factors work toward success. Learned creativity represents the strategies, techniques, methods that enhance abilities and takes advantage of strengths. These cognitive tools help the adult with LD shape the environment to her advantage. The other external factor is the use of support systems/social ecologies. This factor acknowledges the need to surround the individual with people who will provide support, guidance, and help. Mentors are especially important when concentrating on this factor.Although the model is presented as sequential, organized, categorized, the authors acknowledge that life for any individual with LD is messy. Utilizing internal, linking, and external factors requires practice and repeated failure. Acknowledging the developmental process of success is important to the overall understanding of the model and its uses.

ImplicationsThe newly presented model that integrates the two studies of successful adults with LD demon-strates a cohesive and sequential flow of a collection of factors that resulted in success for the adults interviewed across both studies. This comprehensive model is leading edge work in this area and is intended to be the foundation for further work in the field. The model provides a framework for researchers to discern LD issues throughout the lifespan and allows practitioners to develop transition and postsecondary activities and programs aimed at the success of youth with LD. By using the framework, the model gives a map of the key struggles and growth points that adults with LD experience as they aspire to success. The fact that the linking factors change as the individual provides a developmental perspective that can be applied throughout an individual’s life.

Vocational ResearchersFuture research should explore concerns related to validity of the model. Both experts in the field, as well as successful adults with LD, should critically judge the factors and organization of the model. Additionally, the internal structure of the model should undergo scrutiny to determine the relationships among the factors. The need remains for further study of successful individu-


als with LD to determine if these factors continue to hold their value. The impact of federal regulations, budgetary constraints, attention to and improvement of transition services may have changed outcomes of high school graduates. Additionally, a broader population of students with LD has had to meet more rigorous curricular requirements that may change their life long goals. Certainly, the impact of the economic changes of the past decade will shift success for all young people, and how that affects students with LD both internally and externally has yet to be ex-perienced. The model seems to contain information that would be of value to families and pro-fessionals; however, what is immediately apparent is the continued need for attention to adults with LD. As with services for individuals with LD, more funding of longitudinal and follow-up research is necessary for greater insight into the workings of these individuals. As greater num-bers of students age into adulthood, their experiences chronicled through words and perceptions are important to document. Populations of students who have participated in programs specific to their needs may result in different findings.

Career PractitionersThe conceptual model has multiple uses for practitioners at the individual client and program levels. Diagnostically, a practitioner can assess how well an individual understands and applies each factor while moving among internal, linking, and external factors. Professionals can inte-grate the model into their interventions on three basic levels: Instructing during teachable mo-ments, including factors in current activities, and developing new interventions to address spe-cific factors and their relationship to the individual (Frostig Center Educators, 2009). As a group or individual uncover one or more of the factors, the practitioner should highlight the factor and where it rests on the model. For instance, individuals may discover goodness of fit as they begin to refine their career options. Similarly, when an individual or group struggles to complete a chal-lenging task, a discussion of persistence/perseverance may be included in the session. Likewise, reaching a level of self-awareness requires intensive effort and multiple opportunities for refine-ment. Once the components of the model grow in familiarity, the individual client and profes-sional will be more clearly understanding of the complexities of success.

ConclusionsVery similar findings resulted from two studies interested in what makes an adult with LD suc-cessful. The commonalities and difference were gathered across the results of the two sets of findings into a consolidated model of success. The information will prove useful to a variety of professionals who serve students with LD. The model categorizes the success factors as internal, linking, or external. The categories represent a move from the individual’s thoughts to the or-ganization of self through strategies and practice to manipulation of the environment and access to assistance from others. The intent of the model is to present a fresh approach to viewing LD across the life span.

ReferencesAgarwal, N., Calvo, B.A., & Kumar, V. (2014). Paving the road to success: A students with disabilities organization in a university setting. College Student Journal 48, 34-44.


Coppola, G. (2007, December 12). Why dyslexics make great entrepreneurs. Business Week.Retrieved from www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/296946-why-dyslexics-make-great-entrepreneurs?type=old_article

Cowen, S.E. (1988). Coping strategies of university students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 21, 161-188. doi: 10.1177/002221948802100308

Frostig Center Educators (2009). The Six success factors for children with learning disabilities: Ready-to-use activities to help kids with LD succeed in school and in life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gerber, P.J. (2012). The impact of learning disabilities on adulthood: A review of the evidence-based literature for research and practice in adult education. Journal of Learning Disabilities 45, 31-46. doi:10.1177/002221941426858

Gerber, P.J., Ginsberg, R., & Reiff, H.B. (1992). Identifying alterable patterns in employment success for highly successful adults with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 25, 475-487.

Gerber, P.J., & Raskind, M.H. (2013). Leaders, visionaries, and dreamers: Extraordinary people with dyslexia and other learning disabilities. New York:Nova Science Publishing.

Gerber, P.J., & Reiff, H.B. (1991). Speaking for themselves: Ethnographic interviews with adults with learning disabilities. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Gerber, P.J., Schnieders, C.A., Paradise, L.V., Reiff, H.B., Ginsberg, R., & Popp, P.A. (2001). Persisting problems of adults with learning disabilities: Self-reported comparisons from their school-age and adults years. Journal of Learning Disabilities 22, 570-573.

Goldberg, R.J., Higgins, E.L., Raskind, M.H., & Herman, K.L. (2003). Predictors of success in individuals with learning disabilities: A qualitative analysis of a 20-year longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 18, 222-236. doi: 10.1111/1540-5826.00077

Greenbaum, B., Graham, S., & Scales, W. (1996). Adults with learning disabilities: Occupational and social status after college. Journal of Learning Disabilities 29, 167-173. doi: 10.1177/002221949602900206

Higgins, E.L., Raskind, M.H., Goldberg, R.J., & Herman, K.L. (2002). Stages of acceptance of a learning disability: The impact of labeling. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 25, 3-18. doi: 10.2307/1511187

Horn, W.F., O’Donnell, J.P., & Vitulano, L.A. (2001). Long-term follow-up studies of learning-disabled persons. Journal of Learning Disabilities 16, 542-555.


Kiernan, W.E., & Stark, J.A. (1986). Employment options for adults with developmental disabilities: A conceptual model. Remedial and Special Education 7, 7-11. doi:10.1177/074193258600700605

Klassen, R.M., Tze, V.M.C., & Hannok, W. (2011). Internalizing problems of adults with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities 46, 317-327.doi: 10.1177/0022219411422260

Konrad, M., Fowler, C.H., Walker, A.R., Test, D.W., & Wood, W.M. (2007). Effects of self-determination interventions on the academic skills of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly 30, 89-113. doi: 10.2307/30035545

Love, D. (2011, May 19). 15 CEOs with LD. Business Insider. Retrieved from www.businessinsider.com/ceo-learing-disabilities-2011-5?op=1

Madaus, J.W., Zhao, J., & Ruban, L. (2008). Employment satisfaction of university graduates with LD. Remedial and Special Education 29, 232-332. doi:10.1177/0741932507312012

McNulty, M.A. (2003). Dyslexia and the life course. Journal of Learning Disabilities 36, 363-381. doi:10.1177/00222194030360040701

Murray, C. (2003). Risk factors, protective factors, vulnerability, and resilience: A framework for understanding and supporting the adult transitions of youth with high-incidence disabilities. Remedial and Special Education 24 (1), 16-26. doi: 10.1177/07419325030240012

Polloway, E.A., Patton, J.R., Smith, T.E.C., & Buck, G.H. (1997). Mental retardation and learning disabilities: Conceptual and applied issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30297-308, 345.

Prater, M.A., Redman, A.S., Anderson, D., & Gibb, G.S. (2014). Teaching adolescent students with learning disabilities to self-advocate for accommodations. Intervention in School and Clinic 49, 298-305. doi:10.1177/10534512135133958

Raskind, M.H., Goldberg, R.J., Higgins, E.L., & Herman, K.L. (1999). Patterns of change and predictors of success in individuals with learning disabilities: Results from a twenty-year longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 14, 35-49. doi: 10.1207/sldrp1401_4

Raskind, M.H., Goldberg, R.J., Higgins, E.J., & Herman, K.L. (2002). Teaching “life success” to students with learning disabilities: Lessons learned from a 20-year study. Intervention in School and Clinic 37, 201-208. doi:10.1177/105345120203700402


Reiff, H.B., Gerber, P.J., & Ginsberg, R. (1997). Exceeding expectations: Successful adults with learning disabilities. Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.

Rock, E.E., Fessler, M.A., & Church, R.P. (1997). The concomitance of learning disabilities and behavioral disorders: A conceptual model. Journal of Learning Disabilities 30, 245-263. doi: 10.1177/002221949703000302

Rogan, L., & Hartmann, L. (1976). A follow-up study of learning disabled children as adults. (Final Report, Project No. 443CH600100). Washington, DC: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Spekman, N.J., Goldberg, R.J., & Herman, K.L. (1993). An exploration of risk and resilience in the lives of individuals with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 8, 11-18.

Spekman, N.J., Goldberg, R.J., Herman, K.L. (1992). Learning disabled children grow up: A search for factors related to success in the young adult years. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 7, 161-170.

Teglasi, H., Cohn, A, & Meshbesher, N. (2004). Temperament and learning disability. Learning Disability Quarterly 27, 9-20.

Vogel, S.A., & Adelman, P.B. (1992). The success of college students with learning disabilities: Factors related to educational attainment. Journal of Learning Disabilities 25, 430-441.

Young, S. (2005). Coping strategies used by adults with ADHD. Personality and Individual Differences 38, 809-816. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.06.005


Table 1 Definitions of Factors Internal Factors Linking Factors External Factors Desire: desire to excel, to get ahead, move on

Emotional coping strategies: effective means to reduce or cope with stress, frustration, emotional problems

Learned creativity: strategies, techniques to enhance abilities; learn to take advantage of strengths

Perseverance: keep going despite adversity

Reframing: redefining LD positively/productively

Use of support systems: significant others that provide support, guidance, and encouragement; consider some mentors

Persistence: resilient, willing to do whatever is necessary to accomplish goal

Proactivity: engaged in the world, participates in community; power to control their outcomes; makes decisions and acts on them, assertive, self-confident

Social ecologies: surround self with supportive and helpful people, created support networks, consciously selected mentors

Goal setting: set specific, flexible goals throughout life

Goodness of fit: fit themselves into environments where they would succeed

Goal orientation: consciously sets explicit goals related to desires

Self-awareness: aware of strengths, weaknesses, & talent, compartmentalized LD and pick niche capitalizing on strengths

Note. Frostig Study Gerber Study !

APPENDICES: Table 1: Definitions of Factors


Figure 1. Factors Throughout the Lifespan Internal Factors Linking Factors External Factors Desire Perseverance/Persistence

Emotional coping Learned creativity

Goal setting/orientation Reframing Support systems/Social ecologies

Self-Awareness

Proactivity

Goodness of fit Note. Frostig study Gerber study !

APPENDICES: Figure 1: Factors Throughout the Lifespan


About the AuthorsChris Schnieders, PhD, is Research Director at the Frostig Center in Pasadena, California. She began working at the Frostig Center in 2001. She is a certified professional developer in the Strategic Instruction Model and is a part time instructor at California State University, Northridge. Prior to moving to California, she worked in higher education. Her K-12 experience includes administrative work at psychiatric hospitals and as a teacher and diagnostician in New Orleans. Her research interests include instructional effectiveness for students with learning disabilities and efficacy of success attributes. Contact her at the Frostig Center, 971 North Altadena Drive, Pasadena, CA 91107. 626-791-1255. Web Site:www.frostig.org

Paul J. Gerber, PhD is the Ruth Harris Endowed Professor of Dyslexia Studies and Professor in the Department of Special Education and Disability Policy at Virginia Commonwealth University. He has written or co-written five books in the area of adults with learning disabilities and over one hundred articles and chapters pertaining to learning disabilities. He is on numerous journal editorial boards and has been the editor of Thalamus, the journal of the International Academy for Research in Learning Disabilities. He has consulted for government agencies. Currently, he is a member of the professional advisory board of the Learning Disabilities Association of America. Contact:Paul J. Gerber, PhD, ProfessorVCU School of Education, 1015 W. Main St. P.O. Box 842020Richmond, VA 23284-2020. e-mail: [email protected](804) 828-1332. Office: (804) 225-3554

Roberta J. Goldberg, PhD, is a Licensed Developmental Psychologist with 35 years of experience consulting with schools, teachers and parents concerning children’s learning needs. She earned the PhD in Developmental Psychology and School Psychology at the University of Minnesota. At the Frostig Center, she has served as Clinical Director, and is currently Director of the Consultation and Education Department.As Research Associate at the Frostig Center, her main area of interest has been a twenty-year longitudinal project studying children growing up with learning disabilities. She has presented this research at national and international conferences, published numerous articles in the area of success attributes for individuals with learning disabilities and speaks frequently to audiences concerning children’s learning and behavior. Contact her at the Frostig Center, 971 North Altadena Drive, Pasadena, CA 91107. 626-791-1255.

integrating findings of studies of successful adults with ... - frostig… · winter...

Documents